Jerusalem's Final Status: It Is Time For Single-Issue Grassroots Activism

Conventional wisdom has it that the pro-Israeli pressure groups have 50 or more years of organizational experience in the US. Often times this argument is waved by some as a justification for ineffective grassroots organization or inaction. While there is some truth to this, a pro-Jerusalem agenda should be a consensus agenda not associated with other controversial and divisive issues which have weakened numerous campaigns in the past. Jerusalem, it can be said, is the mother of international consensus issues in this day and age. With the exception of the US, where our efforts need focus, the world is in agreement that a shared Jerusalem along the 1967 borders is a fair formula which promotes a long lasting peace in the Middle East as declared by UN Resolution 242.

The goal of an Arab and Muslim pro-Jerusalem campaign is to offset right-wing Jewish extremists' influence in the US by creating a single-issue Arab and Muslim counterbalance committed to a shared Jerusalem. The presence of a cross-organizational coordination plan for Arab and Muslim activism and a corresponding intellectual effort to support it, can result in a concerted effort aimed at setting the stage for a less hostile negotiating environment for the Palestinians by providing support at the home front in our nations' Capitol.

Currently, and besides the occasional lip service and occasional action alert, no effective unified strategy amongst Arab and Muslim organizations exists and few are calling on their members to rally for final status. This we hope will change very soon. An international consensus issue such as the shared Jerusalem settlement should make it less contentious for many Arab and Muslim American leaders to campaign jointly for.

PRINCIPLE-BASED VS. RESULT-BASED ACTIVISM

All the lessons learned from former successes or setbacks in grassroots activism amount to little if we do not regroup and wage a focused, well-planned, and executed campaign for a shared Jerusalem.

For new comers to grassroots activism and at the risk of preaching to the choirs, Arab and Muslim Americans should take it upon themselves to express their views to elected officials periodically to win their support, or neutrality if not possible, for a shared Jerusalem settlement. Generous contributions should be made to help progressive incumbents or candidates in their effort to promote the Jerusalem consensus agenda. Corresponding with members of the local and national media is also key. These are the basics of grassroots activism and the absolute minimum one must offer as duty even when doubting the process or the outcome. This is principle-based activism to be taken seriously regardless of one's assessment of the results. Timing and duty are the issues today.

Presently, few Arab or Muslim organizations have geared up for final status negotiations. The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (http://www.adc.org) has engaged in proactive educational campaigns on Jerusalem in recent times. The Arab American Institute have also contributed to elevating the Palestinian tragedy from a taboo to an issue both sides can debate at ease in the US media and policy making circles. But often times an organization needs to hear from committed members to help define its operational agenda. Emphasize to your organization the need for action and the limited time frame remaining.

Given the presence of some overly "pragmatic" Arab and Muslim leaders, one should look for the organization's official written position on the issue of Jerusalem and ensure clarity of position including a return to 1967 borders and support for UN Resolution 242 before committing time and money to these campaigns. No verbal positions on Jerusalem should be accepted. Pragmatism has its role but it is means to a clear non-negotiable end. Sometimes this arrangement is reversed, and herein lies the danger.

Many organizations are fair-minded and committed but with a clear and limited agenda which does not include Jerusalem. It is their right to limit their agenda as long as members are made aware of such constraints.

To preserve "access" to government contacts, some Arab American leaders will invoke the questionable tactics of "quite diplomacy." Not now, not for Jerusalem, and not while final status negotiations are on the horizons. This is the time to articulate a firm position and to be outspoken. Organizations seeking to accommodate the present US foreign policy on the issue of Jerusalem have forfeited their right to be players and can cause more damage in the process of watering down the issues and splitting the ranks with a confused agenda. With final status negotiations pending, we should be in the business to change policy not to accommodate it. Caveat Activists.